Chest physiotherapy on intracranial pressure of critically ill patients admitted to the intensive care unit: a systematic review

Ferreira, Lucas Lima; Valenti, Vítor Engrácia; Vanderlei, Luiz Carlos Marques

doi:10.5935/0103-507x.20130055

Cited by 16 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 26 publications

(33 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…[ 20 ] The total scores of PEDro were 11 points: ≥4 points were regarded as high quality and <4 points were regarded as low quality. [ 21 ] For each domain, the low, high, or unclear risk of bias was assigned by a judgment of “yes,” “no,” or “unclear,” respectively. The study was considered as low risk of bias if one or no domain was decided “unclear” or “no.” The study was regarded as moderate risk of bias if 2 or 3 domains were considered “unclear” or “no.” The study was regarded as high risk of bias if 4 or more domains were considered “unclear” or “no.” [ 22 ] Quality assessment together with investigation of publication bias was performed using Review Manager 5 (RevMan 5.2.3, Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, UK).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Efficacy and safety of 9 nonoperative regimens for the treatment of spinal cord injury

Ma¹,

Zhang²,

Jin³

et al. 2017

Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Efficacy and safety of 9 nonoperative regimens for the treatment of spinal cord injury

Ma¹,

Zhang²,

Jin³

et al. 2017

Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The methodological quality of the included RCTs was evaluated using Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale by two or more investigators [ 39 ]. The total scores of PEDro are 11 points, which is divided into high quality (scored ≥ four points) and low quality (scored < four points) [ 40 ].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Meta-analysis of differences in Constant-Murley scores for three mid-shaft clavicular fracture treatments

Jiang

Wang

et al. 2017

Oncotarget

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is no consensus on the optimal treatment for mid-shaft clavicular fracture. We conducted a meta-analysis to compare the effectiveness of non-operative treatment, plate fixation, and intramedullary pin fixation in terms of the Constant-Murley Score (CMS) for treatment of mid-shaft clavicular fracture. Comprehensive search of the Embase, Cochrane Library and PubMed was conducted to retrieve relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs). A random-effect network meta-analysis was conducted within a Bayesian framework using Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) in OpenBUGS 3.2.2. Differences in CMS among the three treatments analyzed were evaluated with weighted mean difference (WMD) and surface under the cumulative ranking curves (SUCRA). Eleven studies met our inclusion criteria and were included in our network meta-analysis. Our results revealed that in terms of CMS followed-up for six months, the efficacies of plate fixation and intramedullary pin fixation were higher than non-operative treatment (plate fixation: WMD = 4.70, 95% CI = 1.21 ∼ 7.83; intramedullary pin fixation: WMD = 6.71, 95% CI = 3.20 ∼ 10.39), and intramedullary pin fixation had better efficacy than plate fixation, had better efficacy. However, no differences were found between the efficacies of the three treatments in pairwise comparisons with respect to CMS followed-up for six weeks, three months, 12 months and 24 months. In addition, the cluster analysis showed that intramedullary pin fixation had the best efficacy for patients with mid-shaft CF, followed by plate fixation and non-operative treatment. These analyses suggest intramedullary pin fixation may be the optimal therapeutic approach for mid-shaft clavicular fracture patients.

show abstract

“…More than two researchers assessed the quality of the included studies using the PEDro scale (Maher, Sherrington, Herbert, Moseley, & Elkins, 2003). The PEDro scale includes 11 scores: and ≥4 scores indicate high quality, whereas <4 scores indicate poor quality (Ferreira, Valenti, & Vanderlei, 2013).…”

Section: Data Extraction and Quality Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Efficacy of different antidiabetic drugs based on metformin in the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus: A network meta‐analysis involving eight eligible randomized‐controlled trials

Peng

Chen

Liu

et al. 2018

Journal Cellular Physiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Diabetes mellitus is one of the most prevalent metabolic diseases globally and it is increasing in prevalence. It is one of the most expensive diseases with respect to total health care costs per patient as a result of its chronic nature and its severe complications. To provide a more effective treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), this study aims to compare different efficacies of six kinds of hypoglycemic drugs based on metformin, including glimepiride, pioglitazone, exenatide, glibenclamide, rosiglitazone, and vildagliptin, in T2DM by a network meta-analysis that were verified by randomized-controlled trials (RCTs). Eight eligible RCT in consistency with the aforementioned six hypoglycemic drugs for T2DM were included. The results of network meta-analysis demonstrated that the exenatide + metformin and vildagliptin + metformin regimens presented with better efficacy. Patients with T2DM with unsatisfactory blood glucose control based on diet control, proper exercise, and metformin treatment were included. The original regimen and dose of medication were unchanged, followed by the addition of glimepiride, pioglitazone, exenatide, glibenclamide, rosiglitazone, and vildagliptin. The results of RCTs showed that all these six kinds of drugs reduced the HbA1c level. Compared with other regimens, exenatide + metformin reduced fasting plasma glucose (FPG), fasting plasma insulin (FPI), total cholesterol (TC), and homeostasis model assessment insulin resistance index (HOMA-IR) levels, but increased the high-density lipoprotein (HDL) level; vildagliptin + metformin decreased FPI and low-density lipoprotein (LDL) levels; glibenclamide + metformin decreased the FPG level, but promoted HDL; and glimepiride + metformin decreased the TC level and rosiglitazone + metformin reduced the LDL level. Our findings indicated that exenatide + metformin and vildagliptin + metformin have better efficacy in T2DM since they can improve insulin sensitivity.

show abstract

Chest physiotherapy on intracranial pressure of critically ill patients admitted to the intensive care unit: a systematic review

Cited by 16 publications

References 26 publications

Efficacy and safety of 9 nonoperative regimens for the treatment of spinal cord injury

Efficacy and safety of 9 nonoperative regimens for the treatment of spinal cord injury

Meta-analysis of differences in Constant-Murley scores for three mid-shaft clavicular fracture treatments

Efficacy of different antidiabetic drugs based on metformin in the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus: A network meta‐analysis involving eight eligible randomized‐controlled trials

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About